Back to Blog
CAFC-ITCOctober 22, 2026·25-1439·Motion granted; appeal dismissed.

Shoals Technologies Group, LLC v. ITC

International Trade Commission

Holding

The Federal Circuit granted Shoals's motion to voluntarily withdraw its appeal from the ITC's Investigation No. 337-TA-1365 and dismissed the appeal, over the intervenors' opposition. Costs were awarded to the intervenors, Voltage.

Why It Matters

A voluntary dismissal ends the appeal without any ruling on the merits, and the court still taxed costs against the withdrawing appellant despite the ITC's non-opposition. The order gives no guidance on any patent issue.

Full Summary

Shoals Technologies Group, LLC v. ITC The Federal Circuit granted Shoals's motion to voluntarily withdraw its appeal from the ITC's Investigation No. 337-TA-1365 and dismissed the appeal, over the intervenors' opposition. Costs were awarded to the intervenors, Voltage. A voluntary dismissal ends the appeal without any ruling on the merits, and the court still taxed costs against the withdrawing appellant despite the ITC's non-opposition. The order gives no guidance on any patent issue. Motion granted; appeal dismissed. Shoals Technologies Group, LLC appealed from the ITC in Investigation No. 337-TA-1365; Voltage LLC and Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co. intervened. Shoals moved to voluntarily withdraw the appeal. The motion stated that the ITC did not oppose it, while Voltage opposed it. The panel (Chen, Linn, and Cunningham, Circuit Judges) granted the motion per curiam and dismissed the appeal. Costs were awarded to Voltage. The order states no reasoning and does not identify the patents or issues involved. standing / jurisdiction non-precedential standing / jurisdiction non-precedential standing / jurisdiction

Key Points

  • Shoals Technologies Group, LLC appealed from the ITC in Investigation No. 337-TA-1365; Voltage LLC and Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co. intervened.
  • Shoals moved to voluntarily withdraw the appeal. The motion stated that the ITC did not oppose it, while Voltage opposed it.
  • The panel (Chen, Linn, and Cunningham, Circuit Judges) granted the motion per curiam and dismissed the appeal.
  • Costs were awarded to Voltage. The order states no reasoning and does not identify the patents or issues involved.
standing / jurisdictionnon-precedential

How this summary was made: Drafted with AI from the court's opinion or order; before publishing, code checked that the quotation and the citations it gives appear in that document. Editorial policy

More on this topic

New to District court litigation? Start with PTAB vs. District Court: Where to Challenge a Patent’s Validity